Green Tech

President-elect Barack Obama's choice of James Jones as national security adviser brings a retired Marine general who advocates a comprehensive overhaul to U.S. energy policy in the name of national defense.

Jones was announced on Monday as part of the Obama administration's national security team. He has been president and CEO of the Institute for 21st Century Energy, an affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The group last month published a detailed set of recommendations on energy policy, written as a memorandum to Obama. (Click here for PDF.)

James Jones, incoming national security adviser

(Credit: Institute for 21st Century Energy)

In the transition paper, Jones says "our country urgently requires a balanced and enduring strategy to meet our growing needs. America stands at a defining moment where the decisions made today will influence the economic prosperity, global competitiveness, and national security of future generations."

The policy recommendations cover a broad swath, including support for clean technologies, such as energy efficiency and renewable energy, as well as further investments in climate science.

The plan argues for increased domestic oil and gas drilling, a commitment to so-called clean-coal technology, and increased use of nuclear energy. It also calls for an upgrade to the U.S. power grid electricity distribution network.

The briefing is meant to form the basis of a more strategic and comprehensive energy policy, which the Institute for 21st Century Energy argues can improve national security and economic competitiveness.

From the memo:

"What is needed instead is a more strategic and comprehensive approach to address the broad underlying trends in energy markets--some long standing, some only recently emerging--that are and will remain significant challenges unless we muster the will to adopt a sound enduring energy policy. A sluggish economy teetering on, if not in, a recession and the recent crisis in the financial markets makes tackling these challenges all the more pressing, not less so, because at its most fundamental level, energy security is a critical underpinning of a healthy economy."

Since being elected, Obama has said that energy and environmental policy will be one of the top priorities when his administration comes into office.

Tempering expectations over bold clean-energy initiatives is the poor state of the economy.

Tesla Motors, a start-up focused on high-performance electric cars, appears to be in a bit of trouble.

Although Tesla just raised an additional $40 million, it is asking for $400 million in low-interest loans from the federal government as part of the $25 billion loan package to the auto industry.

Yeah, I know that Tesla is working on cool electric technology for high-performance cars that could help our country ease its heroin-like addiction to foreign oil. That said, are the Valley-based VCs and big-wigs who back Tesla really serious?

Tesla may be a technological marvel and it is located in Silicon Valley, but Tesla is not an IT start-up per se. In the automotive industry, it can take billions of dollars and many years to get a product to market. Didn't the VCs anticipate this type of money and time commitment up front?

As the old saying goes, "When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." Valley VCs seem to live by this mantra, believing that all business is like the technology business. You know, fund some smart guys with an idea and development chops, get a 1.0 product out, and then enhance the product as you create a sales and marketing team, build channels, and sign customers.

If you execute well with this formula, you may have a lucrative exit in three to five years. The problem is that other industries don't work this way. The next wave of technology breakthroughs will require big dough and lots of patience--a combination that is really an anathema to VCs.

Good luck, Tesla, but Washington ain't Interop. You can throw lots of clean-energy market hype around, but there won't be much support in Congress to bail out VC firms, Valley multimillionaires, and a shoe-string manufacturer of cars for fat cats. There are too many others who really need the money.

While millions of Americans watch the saga of the Big Three automakers pleading the federal government for a bailout, the finances of tiny electric car start-ups are coming under the microscope.

The Irish Independent newspaper on Sunday reported--incorrectly--that Irish utility Electricity Supply Board (ESB) invested in all-electric luxury car make Tesla Motors.

A representative from ESB on Monday said that ESB's clean-tech fund put a bit less than $20 million into a fund run by Tesla investor Vantage Point Venture Partners. ESB's money has not gone directly into Tesla, but ESB is backing other clean-tech companies including electric car firm Better Place as well as solar firms Miasole and Brightsource Energy

Although it's not involved with Tesla, ESB's investment in Better Place shows that the idea of electric utility investing in a car company is far from outlandish.

The Irish government recently launched a program designed to get 10 percent of cars running on electricity by 2020, according to reports. Denmark, Israel, and Portugal have signed on with Better Place to build a network of charging stations.

Meanwhile in the U.S., utilities are considering purchasing thousands of plug-in electric cars to jump-start the industry for battery-powered cars and to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, according to a recent report in The Wall Street Journal.

Car companies in spotlight
The topic of automakers' finances is becoming a daily topic in the news.

Top executives from the financially strapped Big Three car companies are scheduled to go back to Washington, D.C., this week to present a turnaround plan which they hope will result in a federal government loan.

Tesla itself is having cash-flow problems. The company had tried unsuccessfully to raise $100 million earlier this year. Instead, it secured $40 million in convertible debt.

But the idea of giving money to aid auto start-ups apparently has rubbed some people the wrong way. The New York Times on Sunday ran a column criticizing Tesla because it is angling for federal assistance.

Tesla hopes to secure a portion of the $25 billion set aside in 2007 for auto companies to retool. It has also applied for a loan guarantee worth up to $400 million to build a plant for its second electric car, called the Model S.

Henrik Fisker, CEO of competitor Fisker Automotive, which is making a plug-in hybrid luxury sedan called the Karma, last week said that he thinks that Fisker should get a piece of the federal assistance as well.

Tesla's argument for getting federal incentives is that it has managed to produce a much-coveted electric car--the Roadster--after having raised less than $200 million, a relatively small sum for a car company.

But federal assistance going toward a luxury car company which caters to multimillionaires and billionaires seems unjust to New York Times columnist Randall Stross.

"The program is intended to encourage automakers to improve fuel efficiency, but should it be used for a purpose like this, as the 2008 Bailout of Very, Very High-Net-Worth Individuals Who Invested in Tesla Motors Act? Can you conceive any way that federal dollars could be put at greater risk--and for no equity in return, keep in mind--to benefit fewer people?," he wrote.

On Thursday, Tesla's vice president of business development, Diarmuid O'Connell, said on the company's blog that the intent of the $25 billion "retooling" money was to spur technology innovation, rather than to keep auto companies from running out of cash.

Judging from the flow of venture-capital money, the auto sector is poised for substantial technology change. A report on Monday from Xconomy noted that investments in auto start-ups have skyrocketed in the past two years.

"It's a difficult industry, but there are opportunities. It is a $100 billion industry in which innovations are really needed, really fast," General Catalyst Partners investor Bilal Zuderi said.

Updated at 3:05 pm P.T. with corrected figure.

Retailers anticipate a bleak Black Friday. Yet, despite the economic downturn, many Americans are still cramming into malls in hopes of snagging the best and earliest holiday buys.

Some consumers, on the other hand, will shun shopping and observe "Buy Nothing Day," a loosely organized protest against conspicuous consumption. The idea comes from Adbusters, an artsy glossy that counts a circulation of 100,000, plus 80,000 online members of its "culture-jamming" network of social pranksters.

Participants in a wiki for the event have planned demonstrations at shopping centers around the country, including the mammoth Mall of America in Minnesota. Some San Franciscans are opting to swap used stuff at the Really Really Free Market outside in Dolores Park. Wikipedia entries track activities in 65 countries.

Followers of Buy Nothing Day blame unchecked consumerism for ecological woes, psychological depression, and the economic crisis.

(Credit: Adbusters Media Foundation)

The Adbusters Web site suggests repeating pranks performed by tens of thousands of people at malls in recent years, like wandering around in zombie gear. Some might stage a "Whirl Mart," roaming in packs at Wal-Mart stores with packed shopping carts, yet declining to buy anything. Armed with scissors, other participants may offer strangers the free "service" of a credit card cut-up.

Millions of people have heard of Buy Nothing Day by now and it grows each year, although there's no official count of the faithful, according to Kalle Lasn, Adbusters editor in chief and co-founder.

As lists of corporate collapses and layoffs lengthen, the notion of buying less or nothing is becoming less an option and more of a necessity for many people. That's an "I told you so" moment for activists such as those at Adbusters.

"If people had heeded the buy-nothing message, then we wouldn't be in this mess," Lasn said. "This glorified spending and borrowing of the past 10 years is really the root cause of this financial and economic meltdown we're in now."

Big-box retailers are increasingly adding solar panels and wind turbines to sprawling stores to offset rising electricity costs and groom a "green" image.

Last week, Wal-Mart Stores announced it will add wind power to 360 Texas outlets. The company aims to power all stores with renewables eventually. So far, the retailer counting the largest amount of photovoltaics is Wisconsin-based Kohl's. Whole Foods is likely the first big name to add solar panels, starting in 2002 in Berkeley, Calif.

In the latest sign of government support for such efforts, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick called last week for all new malls and massive retailers to install solar panels. That state's rebates of up to 40 percent for photovoltaic installations are among the most attractive in the country for retailers eyeing regional and federal discounts for installing cleaner forms of energy.

This chart tracks some of the most noteworthy developments. Please click on it to view a larger, more legible size.

Here's a sampling of green-tech news, with quick commentary.

• Poet in buyout talks with other ethanol producers--Associated Press
  The largest ethanol maker eyes down-on-their-luck ethanol makers and their plants, which Poet's CEO calls "stranded capital."
• VeraSun receives buyout offer--The Des Moines Register
  VeraSun, which declared bankruptcy earlier this month, confirms it is in buyout talks, with Poet the most likely acquirer.
• Merrill Lynch Research calls cleantech the sixth technology revolution--press release
  Steven Milunovich goes from hardware hot shot to Wall Street analyst looking for the "Google of clean tech."
• Think's electric car is here, but bring your wallet--Greentech Media
  Greentech Media does the math on upcoming electric city cars, pointing to how expensive car batteries are going to be.

Researchers are designing an 'air scrubber' that removes CO2 from the air.
(Credit: University of Calgary)
• Four of six cellulosic ethanol demonstration projects still on track--Biofuels Digest
  Report card on status of DOE-sponsored projects for making ethanol from nonfood feedstocks.
• Capture carbon dioxide out of the air--The Future of Things
  Research on an "air scrubber" that takes trace amounts of CO2 out of the air efficiently for storage, potentially underground.
• Duke Study looks into green job growth in U.S.--press release
  Duke University finds direct link between low-carbon industries and more employment for traditionally blue-collar workers.
• Cleantech Group predicts shakeout, long-term growth--Cleantech Group
  Clean-tech market watchers predict a shift to quality in the downturn.
• Oree lights up with $4M for credit-card-size LEDs --Earth2Tech
  Energy-efficient lighting seems to be an area in clean tech that continues to attract funding.
• Engineering: Suddenly sexy for college grads--BusinessWeek
  Columnist claims engineering is cool again while finance is passe. Given the lack of talent in clean tech, I hope he's right.
• Eric Schmidt speaks about solutions for energy security--Google Public Policy Blog
  Eric Schmidt tells the story of how he made the business decision to invest in efficiency and renewable energy at Google.

IBM has won two deals to supply IT gear and services for utilities' smart-grid energy-efficiency programs.

Ohio-based American Electric Power on Tuesday said that it has chosen IBM to be the systems integrator for its gridSmart initiative, which is designed to upgrade the distribution grid to better handle distributed power generation, storage, and efficiency programs.

Click on the image to see how much energy different home appliances consume.

(Credit: Department of Energy via IBM)

Michigan gas and electric utility Consumers Energy on Tuesday said that it will work with IBM to test out advanced metering infrastructure in a pilot project slated to start early next year.

In smart-grid projects, utilities upgrade the electricity distribution network with communications and data-gathering tools. By getting current information on electricity demand, operators should be able run the grid more efficiently and better spot problems.

In some smart-grid pilots, consumers can get an in-home display of their energy usage and participate in energy-efficiency programs. A household could agree to let utilities dial down appliances, such as clothes dryer, for a short time or take advantage of lower rates by running the dishwasher at off-peak times.

Smart-grid technology has been available for many years, but smart-grid suppliers report that utilities are showing more willingness today to invest in these energy-efficiency programs.

For its part, IBM is investing heavily in smart-grid technology--the intersection of energy and IT--and is involved in several utility smart-grid upgrades around the world.

Last week, IBM and France-based utility EDF announced a research program to study efficiency and "sustainable energy" technologies. This week, it published a video on YouTube explaining the basic concepts of a smart grid.

The Tesla Roadster is simple to drive, but very fast, with smoothly delivered torque.

(Credit: CBS Interactive)

Every automotive journalist who drives a Tesla comes away impressed with the car's power, and I can say the same after taking the car out on a quick drive near the company's Menlo Park, Calif., Tesla store (they don't call it a showroom or dealership).

In Performance mode, the car exhibits powerful and smooth torque, even at speed. I had this little open top roadster at 65 mph on the freeway, then mashed the accelerator (don't call it a gas pedal) and got another powerful push in the back that sent the car quickly up to 90. The Tesla's push is unique among sports cars though. Where a high-stepper such as the BMW M3 makes you feel a kick in the back with every gear shift, the Tesla delivers a strong, steady push when you put your foot down on the pedal.

The Tesla I drove featured "Powertrain 1.5," eliminating the two-speed gearbox from the previous model. Yes, Tesla patterns itself after tech companies, so the power train gets a version designation, although the cars themselves still go by a model year.

In this Tesla, as in other electric cars I've driven, the operation is dead simple: Move the shifter from Neutral to Drive, and you're moving forward. Push the accelerator if you want to go faster and hit the brakes if you want to stop. The only real difference, besides the fact that the Tesla goes a lot faster than other electric cars, is that taking your foot off the accelerator at speeds less than 40 mph makes the car slow down as if you were applying light pressure on the brakes. That is the regenerative power train in operation, using the car's momentum to generate electricity for the battery pack. The Tesla also has regenerative brakes, but you don't need to use them much, adding the side-benefit of very infrequent brake maintenance.

So much has been written about Tesla Motors and its Roadster electric sports car that I fully expected a letdown.

Tell you the truth, if I were personally shelling out $109,000 for one of these babies, I might be pickier about leg room or noise levels or any of the other myriad questions that go through a potential car buyer's mind before signing on the line which is dotted.

But at the risk of gushing, I'm back to report that the Tesla Roadster is a pure adrenaline thrill.

The specs say that the vehicle accelerates from 0 to 60 miles per hour in 3.9 seconds. It sure felt that way. As I tentatively pushed the pedal toward the floor, the Roadster attained speeds that I've never attempted in my 1997 Civic, and I had the oddest sensation. It just did not feel as if the car was moving that fast. (OK, nobody's going to mistake me for Mario Andretti. But it's not as if I've never gunned a vehicle.) It felt like driving a big slot car. Had I not glanced at the speedometer, no way could I have known the vehicle was busting past 90 without a murmur of protest.

The only tip-off that something unusual was going on was the motor's high-pitched whine. Other than that, no vibrations, no buzzing, no shaking, rattling, or rolling.

Kudos to the design team for figuring out how to put amazing thrust at a driver's command without paying a penalty in turbo lag or gear changing. The only thing that takes time getting used to is the car's deceleration when you remove your foot from the pedal. No big deal. After five minutes, that is not an issue. (Check out this brief overview I received from the company's PR director, Rachel Konrad.)

For some reason, the local traffic police were out in force as I tooled around, and so I resisted the invitation to push the envelope (much to the frustration of my Tesla handler who wanted me to approach Warp Factor 9). In a straight mano-a-mano test, there's no way the cops would be able to keep up--although I'm sure that's not one of the arguments Tesla's marketing mavens will play up in any upcoming advertising campaign. (My CNET partner in crime, Brian Cooley, took out another Roadster for a ride. Here's part of his report.)

As a technology story, Tesla stands in contrast to the dreary innovation record turned in by Detroit's automakers the last several years. Unlike the software business, where so many start-ups have been bootstrapped since the Internet bubble burst, when was the last time you heard of a new auto company emerging on the scene? The Roadster clocks in faster than a Porsche 911 and has a driving range of 244 miles on a single charge. But the company's fate likely will be decided by other factors.

Tesla's troubles have been well chronicled. The company was late getting to market, over budget, and recently let go of 20 percent of its staff. But that's old history. The more immediate question now is how much longer CEO Elon Musk will want to fight it out. So far he's had the stomach for the battle--even as the economy deteriorated from bad to worse. The calendar may be in his favor as Tesla is coming to market at an opportune transition time with the incoming Obama administration saying that it wants to foster alternative energy technologies. Now everyone is waiting to see the fine print.

The second point to consider is that Tesla faces a chicken-and-egg situation. While the Roadster remains a specialty item geared at luxury buyers, Tesla is not a volume assembly line operation that can easily force down supplier prices. So far, about 1,200 cars are on order. Before it can it hope to bring its own price tag down to more competitive levels, the company will need to generate more business. A lot more business.

That answer may well determine whether Musk goes down as the next Henry Ford or the second coming of Preston Tucker.

Greenpeace said that electronics manufacturers are making progress on reducing toxic materials and waste, but not making bold enough moves to cut energy usage.

The environmental watchdog on Monday published its 10th Guide to Greener Electronics, which it releases every three months. This edition adds five new criteria for energy, including whether manufacturers report usage, whether they purchase renewable power, and how efficient their products are.

Out of the pack, Nokia is on top, with Nintendo and Microsoft bringing up the rear.

Nokia get props for its comprehensive take-back program, which is now in 124 countries. In 2005, it phased out the use of PVC plastics and has set a target of cutting out brominated flame retardants and antimony trioxide by the end of next year.

Microsoft ended up in the second-to-last position for the second year largely because it has not yet phased out the use of toxic chemicals and doesn't have a voluntary take-back program. Nintendo gets rapped across the knuckles for not committing to a timeline for cutting out hazardous materials .

Meanwhile, Apple--once a last-place finisher--gets kudos from Greenpeace for its recently launched MacBook, which Apple touts as the "industry's greenest notebook." But Apple, too, still uses toxics in many products and it can do more on recycling and greenhouse gas emissions, says Greenpeace.

The lousy scores notwithstanding, Greenpeace says that, as a group, electronics manufacturers are improving when it comes to electronic waste and hazardous chemicals. But it added energy usage to its yardstick because global warming is an urgent problem.

"We need more than green talk from companies before we can call them leaders," said Greenpeace International campaigner Casey Harrell, in a statement. "We need to see action--rapid deployment of clean energy, innovative efficiency solutions and bold advocacy for fast action on global warming."

Perhaps not surprising, the The Consumer Electronics Association reacted a bit defensively to the latest report.

Parker Brugge, vice president of environmental affairs for the Consumer Electronics Association, told The New York Times Green Inc. blog that there has been a good deal of progress within the industry on environmental matters.

At the same time, he acknowledged that there is still more that can be done. "I'm not suggesting the products the industry makes are completely sustainable," he said.

People no doubt complain that Greenpeace is nitpicking or being too harsh in rating electronics manufacturers. But that's what an environmental watchdog group does: set a high bar and encourage corporations to meet it.

If done well, these sorts of scorecards also help consumers sort out the various factors that should back up the many green marketing campaigns.